;F 144 
I .T7 U17 
Copy 1 




T 



B 



RENT0NDARRACK5 



ITTg 



)ftK, 



T 



J, 



ew aers 



i£Vw ,N Ro^ ^rt Wb f/ce r 



/9// 



rrescniei^ tI iiie 



Oorj^ress'foy}^/ Librsiry 



By f^r: C3.rIos F- Goc/freY' 



7^f 



~^^i 




^' 




my fflTin\/f,& ? 





Mr 1 ifi:. m mm^") wm 
m l?[JTAintO 11 lf£- M Mi 

T frnr .^ift«,r jfKE, rnt rjouK 
fic.<' Rvi(.[)in6 'f in c^• /j/:i 




Reproduclion of Original Sfruclure is Made by Arl School Man Under Di- 

rzclion of Mr. talker, Who Also Offers Comprehensive 

Historical Sketch 



Vice Chancellor Edwin Robert 
Walker, at a meeting of the Old Bar- 
racks Association today, presented to 
that organization a beautiful drawing 
of the Old Barracks showing the 
structure as it stood wlien first erected, 
before its partial dismantlement to 
make way for Front Street. 

The drawing was made at Mr. 
Walker's direction by Henry R. Mac- 
Ginnis of the School of Industrial Arts. 
On presenting the picture Mr. Walker 
offered a comprehensive historical 
sketch of the famous old building. 
The Old Barracks Association is 

; composed of the following ladies: 

i President, Mrs. J. Murray Forst; vice 
president, Mrs. Jolm A. Sloan; secre- 
tarj-, Mrs. Harvey M. Voorhees; treas- 
urer, Mrs. Edwin Robert Walker; trus- 
tees, Mrs. Henry W; Green, Mrs. Wel- 
ling G. Sickel, Mrs. Thomas Winans, 
Mrs. John L. Kuser, Mrs. Frank S. 
Katzenbach, Sr., Mrs. Cornelius Hook. 
Mrs. Maria H. Conard, Mrs. John D. 
Faussett, Mrs. S. Duncan Oliphant, 
Mrs. . Jonathan H. Blackwell, Mrs. 
James M. Green and Mrs. A. C. Oli- 
phant. 

The members are: Mrs. S. C. Alli- 
son, Mrs. Josephine T. Breese, Mrs. J. 
H. Blackwell, Miss Clara Blackwell, 
Mrs. J. C. Bloom, Mrs. W. H. Brokaw, 
Mrs. William E. Bissell, Mrs. Thomas 
Craven, Mrs. Charles H. Cook, Mrs. 
Maria Conard, Mrs;- James O. Cle- 
phans, Miss Anna L. Dayton, Mrs. 
Wiliam L. Dayton, Mrs. C. B. Dahl- 
gren, Mrs. S. M. Dickinson, Mrs. Ed- 
ward S .Dunham, Mrs. Daniel J. Bech- 
tel, Mrs. W. Meredith Dickinson, Miss 
Amy Edwards, Mrs. T. J. Falkenburg, 
Mrs. J. Murray Forst, Mrs. John D. 
Faussett, Mrs. A. D. Forst, Mrs. George 
M. Foster, Mrs. Anna W. Golding. 

Mrs. Elmer E. Green, Mrs. Henry W. 
Green, Mrs. James M. Green, Mrs. J. 
F. Godley, Mrs. Barker Gummere, Mrs. 
Cornelius Hook, Mrs, John R. Hill, 
Mrs. Hugh H. Hilson, Mrs. Alexander 
F. Jamieson, Miss S. L. Kean. Mrs. 
John L. Kuser, Mrs. F. S. Katzenbach, 
Sr., Mrs. William C. Lawrence, Mrs. 
Alfred W. Lawshe. Mrs. TVatson H. Din- 
burg, Miss Mary M. Moore, Mrs. Henry 
C Moore, Mrs. N. R. Montgomerj', 
Mrs. Owen Moon, Jr.. JMrs. R. C. Man- 
ning, Mrs. R. C. Maxwell, Mrs. S. D. 

.Oliphant. Mrs. Alexander C. Oliphant. 
Mrs. John '^'■. Pinkham, IMrs. A. A. 

, Post. Mrs. James E. Pope. 

Mrs. Wasliington Roebling, Mrs. 
Irwin W. Rogers. Miss Mary Richer. 
Mrs. Elmer H. Rofcers. IMrs. James F. 
Rusling. Mrs. William 3. Stryker, Mrs. 
E. Merrcr Slirevo. Mrs. W. G. Sirkel, 
Mrs. J. A. Sloan. Mrs. C. L. Traver. 
Mrs. W. J. Taylor. Mrs. Joseph Thomp- 
son. Mrf. Robert Trcnbath. Mrs. H. JI. 



Voorhees. -Mrs. K. R. Walker, Mrs. 
Thomas Winans. Miss Sarah Wood, 
Miss Ellen P. Wood, Mrs. George B. 
Yard. 

The Vice Cliancellor's sketch ac- 
companying the drawing follows: 
To the Old Barracks Association, 
Trenton. New Jersej', Mrs. J. Mur- 
ray Forst, President. 
Dear Madame — Ever since the un- 
veiling of the tablets at the Old Bar- 
racks on June 20. 1909, in which cere- 
monies I had th'c honor tn partieipiite. 
I have thought that your Assnci;uion 
.ihoiild be in possession of a iiicture nf j 
the structure as it storjd when C'stj 
ir«cte(3 and, before its partial d«nioJ-.l 
tion by the opening of Front Street 1 
westerly from Willow Street, and the 
conversion of the northerly wing run- 
ning eastward into dwelling houses. A 
fact not hitherto generally known and 
concerning which the belief has been 
both ways, is, that the old Colonial 
stone and brick dwelling house on the 
northwest corner of Front and Willow 
streets was part and parcel of the or- 
iginal Barraclvs and was the ofBcers' 
quarters. My idea of the desirability 
of the Association having a picture of 
the historic structure has crystallized 
into practical form, and I have had an 
accurate drawing of it made by Mr. 
Henry R. MacGinnis. of the School of 
Industrial Arts, which drawing I here- 
with present to the Association, and 
beg its acceptance at their hands. The 
picture as you will notice exhibits the 
Barracks as they originally stood, and 
also shows the portion still standing, 
now owned and preserved by your 
Association. 

On this occasion it seems to me fit- 
ting that some account of the historic 
old structure should be given that it 
may be preserved in concrete form and 
save trouble hereafter to those who 
would explore the various sources of 
information which I have examined in 
order to write a succinct and veritable 
history of these Barracks. Therefore, 
with your leave, I will now proceed to i 
an account of this matter, pointing out i 
the source of authority for every fact 
disclosed, that it may be easily verified, i 
The reason for the building of the i 
Barracks was set forth in iny address i 
on the occasion of the tablets cere- 1 
monies, in which I said: For a time I 



prayers of the petitions the Legislature! 
made an appropriation for the erection' 
of these very Barracks among others. , 
and they stand today, if not the only, , 
certainly the best preserved, of the de- I 
fensive fortresses built in 1757-1758. i 
I should have stated that a portion of 
the Barracks stood as originally 
erected. I now know that they are 
the only ones standing in anything like 
their pristine condition. 

In the winter of 1757, a petition was 
sent to the general assembly of the 
Providence by magistrates, freeholders 
and inhabitants of the town of Trenton 
and other places adjacent in the county 
of Hunterdon, whicli recited: 

"That altho we your Petitioners 
do with truly Loyal and gratefull 
Hearts acknowledge how much we 
Owe to our Most Gracious Sover- 
eign, and his Parliament, for fur- 1 
nishing us with repeated supplys i 
of Troops at tills Criticall June- 1 
ture of Affairs when our all is i 
threatened and endangered by our 
Inveterate and Potent Enemy, in | 
Conjunction with surrounding na- 
tions of Cruel and deceitfull Sav- 1 
ages. And altho we are chearfully 
willing to exert the utmost of our 
power to render these his Majesties 
Troops perfectly useful, ami to 
answer the jccat euu lA' \<.cicJi 
I they \vere designed, in proportion 
to the number that shall from tin.e 
to time fall to our share to support: 
Yet such is the Scituation of Tren- 
ton being so great a thoroughfare, 
and consequently so many soldiers 
continually passing and repassing 
iipon their Severall Commands, and 
Quartered upon us Nigllt and day, 
that unless by the Assistance of 
tliis Honorable House we can by 
some wholesome Law and legal 
Remedy be eased of this present 
Distress, the Country will be no 
longer able to bear the Burden, 
nor the Officers have it in their 
Power to keep their stragling Sol- 
diers under due Command and 
Subjection. 

"We shall not take upon us to 
dictate to this Honourable House 
what should be the method of this 
Remedy, but hope we may pre- 
sume to offer our Sentiments, that 
if we could be provided with con- 
venient Barracks it would answer 
all ends both as to the conveniency 
and safety that would redound to 
the Troops, as well as the great 
ease and advantage it would be to 
the Subject. 

"We therefore 5'our Petitioners 
Humbly request that this Honour- 
able House would speedily take it 
into Consideration and enable us to 
erect and Build such sufficient and 
Convenient Barracks for the pur- 
pose aforesaid or to give us such 
other adequate Remedy, in such 
Measure, and with such Power & 
Authoritj', and with such Clauses, 
Proviso's and restrictions as to 
this Honourable House, in their 
wisdom shall think meet and fitt. 
"And your Petitioners as in duty 
Bound shall ever Pray, &c." 
This petition was signed by persons, 



preceding the year 1757. the war cry 

of the allies of France was heard upon | many of whom have descendents now 
the then frontier of our country; in! living in Trenton and vicinity, and I 
parts now accessible in a. few hours by! believe it will be of interest to have the 
our modern methods of transportation, signers' names fully copied and set out. 
but then remote. Borne of their fears, | For convenience I have arranged them 
the desire of the colonists that suit- i alphabetically. They are as follows: 



able protection be afforded against the Alex Anderson 
expected incursions of the savage In- John Anderson 
dians, found expression in petitions toi Josiah Appleton 
the Legislature for the erection of ; Charles Axford Jr. 
barracks, in which to house the troops Daniel Bsaler^'eau' 
of Britain and of the colony, mobilized B.enj. Biles " 
for defensive purposes, and at the same Ejjm'an Beakes 
time to ease the burdep of supporting jj^q_ Barnes 
soldiers quartered in the house;, of the (jjfleon Bickordike 



Aza'h Hunt 
Willson Hunt 
Neal Leviston 
Thomas Moore 
W. Morris 
Edward Paxton 
Chas. Pettit 
Jos. Phillips 
David Price 



William Ball Andrew Reed 

Thomas Barnes ciothworthy Reed 

Wm. Cleayton John Ricicey 

AlPX. Chambers James Rutherford 

John Chambers Rob't Rutherford 

Thomas Coalman Vincent Runyan 
Abra Cottnam Theo. Scverns 

James Cumine Rob't Scarff 

George Davles Hezekiah Stout 

Jns. De Cou James Stout 

William Dougless George Tucker 
William Ely Samuel Tucker 

1 Jonathan Furman Samuel Tucker, Jr. 
1 Moore Furman John Vancleave 

ijos. Migrbee J. Warrell 

Richard Hoff Thomas Williams 

Michael Houdin Jethro Yard 

Hezekiah Howell John Yard 
Obadiah Howell Wm. Yard 

There are X9 petitions of similar 
character on file in the military rec- 
ords of the State. (The Old Barracks 
at Trenton. New Jersey, by Adjutant 
i General William S. Stryker, 1885. pages 
4 and 5.) 

On March 31, 17nS, at a session of 
the colonial legislature at Burlington, 
the above mentioned petition of the 
magistrates, freeholders and inhabi- 
tants of the city of Trenton was pre- 
sented to the house, setting forth the 
great inconvenience they lay under for 
■want of barracks and praying that 
barracks might be provided for. was 
read and referred to the committee on 
the bill for that purpose. It was ordered 
by the house »hat the following mem- 
bers, Mr. Johnston, Mr. Yard, Mt.^ 
Read, Mr. Paxson and Mr. Learning. 
be a committee to prepare a plan of the 
manner and an estimate of the expense 
of building barracks for 1,500 men and 
lay the same before the house. The 
■ above named committee on the same 
(day made the following report: 

"W<". the Committee appointed to 

insider of a Plan for building 

irracks for 1,500 Men; and com- 

Miiiing the KxpeiicfS thernf, do 

^ iareby report, tiiat v.-e are ei' Cfiri- 

1 ion, it will be proper to build one 
at BTJPIjINGTON, for SOD Melt; 
'» at TRENTON for 3u0 Men; 
-.c at BRUNSWICK, for 300 Men; 
■ le at AMBOY, for 300 Men; one 
ELIZABETH- TOWN, for 300 
' 'n. And it appearing to us, that 
e Expense of Building will very 
iiuich vary, according to the Place 
where the Building is erected; And 
that It may be necessary also to 
vary the Method of Building in 
several Places, the Bxpence and 
Method are therefore both too un- 
certain for us to form any toler- 
itile Estimate: Our Opinion there- 
. ii-e is, that the best Method the 
.'luse can fall upon, will be to 
^ippoint three responsible Fi'ee- 
holders in each of the above Places, 
and to impower any two of them 
to draw on the Treasury for any 
Sum not exceeding £1,400, for 
ilURLINGTON; nor the sum of 
C 1,400. for TRENTON; nor the 
sum of ,£1,400, for NEW BRUNS- 
WICK; nor the sum of £1,400, for 
AMROY; nor the sum o£ £1,400, 
for ELIZABETH-TOWN; and with 
the moneys so received, to com- 
pleat the said Buildings, in the 
most cheap, expeditious and con- 
\ enient Manner they are capable 
I if. All which is, nevertheless, sub- 
mitted to the House by 

Charles Read, 
Aaron Learning, 
Henry Paxson, 
Joseph Yard." 




VICE CHANCELLOR WALKER. 



building barracks for quartering sol- | of State's office). 



Ebfenezer Miller and Richard Smith 
were appointed trustees for the colony 
of New Jersey in whose names the re- 
spective deeds of the grounds should 
be taken, to and for the use of bar- j 
racks for the questering of soldiers 
whenever they might be sent by proper 
authority to reside in any of the places 
named. ' 

General Stryker Informs us that 
soon after the passage of the above 
\ mentioned act the ground at the west 
end of Front Street where the river 
road (which is now State Street, turn- 
ing -south through what is now Wil- 
low Sireet), was purchosed from Mrs. 
^ ' h Chubb, whose father, Joseph 
T'c I purchased the lot in a tract 
III .,h acres from James Trent, son of 
Willi.im Trent, and that the erection 
of the Barracks was commenced on 
Ma> 31, 1758 (The Old Barracks. &c., 
pages 10, 11 and 12). This deed ap- 
pears never to have been recorded. I 
made a diligent search for it in the^ 
'office of the Secretary of State where 
deeds were recorded at that time, with 
• the assistance of Frank Transue, Esq., 
and Mr. Charles S. Aitkin, of that of- 
fice, but was unsuccessful. Though 
I barracks were built in pursuance of the 
'act in all of the places provided for, 
namely. Burlington, Trenton, Perth 
Amboy. New Brunswick and Eliza- 
i: beth-'Town, only the deed for the Bur- 
f lington barracks, dated June 3, 1758, 
I appears to have been recorded (Book 
■ of Deeds, vol. "O," page 290, Secretary 



diers. (Minutes of Assembly 1758, j 
pages 12 and 13.) 



The committee of the Provincial As- 
sembly were quite right in their sur- 



On Friday, April 7. 1758. Mr. Smith i mise that the expenses of building 
from the committee brought in a bill would very much vary according to 
for the building of barracks which was the place where the building was to 
read and ordered to a second reading, be erected, as I find in the minutes 



On Saturday, April 8, 1758, the en- 
grossed Ijill entitled. "An act for that 
building of Barracks within this Colony, 
and for preventing spirituous Liquors 
being sold to common Soldiers without 



Assembly (1760. fiages 52, 54), 

the barracks at Perth Am- 

cost £4,055-2-7; at Burlington, 

£2,643-9-2; at Elizabeth-Town, includ- 

ins furnishing. £3,589-7-8%; at Tren- 



leave from proper Authority, and fori ton, £1,040-14-2, plus £2.446-6-9, there 



other purposes therein mentioned." was 
read and passed and it was ordered 
that Mr. Nevill and Mr. Read carry 
the bill to the Council (now the Sen 



being a record of two payments with 
reference to our Barracks. 

The building of the Trenton Barracks 
was pushed so rapidly that more than 



ate) for concurrence. On Thursday, 'i one-half of them were filled with sol- 
April 15, 1758, a message was received diers in December 1758. and they were 
from the Council by Mr. Ashfield ac- fully completed in March 1759. Ii 
quainting the house that they had October 1759. the Barracks were oc 
passed the bill for building Ijarracks cupied by a regiment of Highlanders 



witliin this 
amendment. 



( Blinuti'S 
and 2:;,! 
On Saturday, April l-'. If 
John Reading canio inui 
and ha\ing \'y the Hi-vret; 



&c'., without, whose peculiar dress created much in- 

t Assembly ' terest anion gthe people of the town. 

S (The Old Barracks, &c.. page 12.) j 

•iS, Gn\ ernnr || -vve come now to the interesting 

'ouncil 1 question of the old colonial house onj 

uired j the northwest corner of Front and Wil- 



■ the attendance of the House of As- ? Kiw streets. General Stryker says that 
isembly. the Speaker with the House' *" December 1759 a small addition was 
attended- "When His Honotir t^qs \nuit to the Barracks for the use ex- 
nleased to Give his Assent to the BiMl i clusively of the officers m charge of 

pleased to one nis ^J,^,^ ^ ■°..- ! the English troops. (The Old Barracks, 

&c.. page 12.) 

The Barracks, as you know, were 
erected in the form of three sides of a 
hollow square, the main building run- 
ning north and south with two wings, 
one at the northerly and the other at 
the southerly end. both extending east- 
ward. Genera! Stryker says it was 
liiiiU entirely of stone, undressed, two 
st.irie.? in heigfe"., the main building 
j:;ii fci-t in lenMh and lf>M feet in 
width, with two wings each 58 feet 
in length. The time between the com- 
Vleliun of the Barracks in Marub 1759. 
until December, wnen the addition for 
the officers was built, and when the 
building must have resembled the only 
pictures of it which have ever been 
published, namely, three sides of a hol- 
low square with wings of equal dl- 



Entituled an Act for Building of Bat 
racks within this Colony," &c. (Jour- 
nal of the Provincial Council, N. J. 
Archives, vol. 17, i). 165.) 

The act thus passed provided that 
the treasurers of the colony pay unto 
Hugh Hartshorn, Thomas Scattergood, 
William Skeels, John Allen. Joseph 
Yard, Theophilus Severns, Reuben 
Runion, Henry Fisher, Joseph Mount. 
Samuel Nevill, Thomas Barton. John 
Smyth, Robert Ogden, Cornelius Hat- 
field and Jacob Dehart, such sum or 
sums of money, as they might think 
necessary for erecting and building 
barracks sufficient to contain three 
hundred men. at each of the respec- 
- -• Trenton, 



five places of Burlington, 
owoci... .....^. J.Perth Ambov, New Brunswick and 

he report was unanimously agreed i-ii^Xh-th-Town together with neces- 

and It was ordered that the fol- f'if ''e^onveniences and further that - -.--^ -. 

ng members. Mr. Smith, Mr. Nevill; rli^.„, Tniin<!on Tames Hude, Rich- mensions, is a period of months only. 

Read. Mr. Fisher and Mr. Yard, rJl^'^I^.^VS^wt Lawrence Charles after which time until the partial dem- 



. i»^»u. i.ii. .. .c..^.i a.,u ..Ti,. la.ui , csnlter Robert Lawrence, ijnarieB <*«ici nm^n ih.ib uum mepamai ucui- 
a committee to bring In a hill fo^ gga^T Wi"iani Morris. John Johnson, olitlon of the building for the opening 



of Front Street the appearance of the 
building must have been unchanged 
and included the officers' quarters, 
which were, in fact, the colonial house 
on the northwest corner of Willow and 
Front Streets. I assume that Gen- 
eral Stryker was correct when he says 
that the officers' quarters were built in 
December, 1759, although he does not 
disclose the source of this authority, 
nor does he mention the colonial build- 
ing- as being those quarters. He 
doubtless assumed that that was a fact 
known to those who were conversant 
with local history. However, jn the 
twenty-six years that have elapsed 
since his pamphlet was written, this 
fact, if ever generally known here, has 
been practically buried with the older 
Inhabitants who have passed away) 
and is almost entirely unknown to the 
living Trentonians of today. I was 
able to find only one person who could 
assure me of the historical fact that 
this building was the officers' quarters 
and part and parcel of the Barracks 
built in 1759. and that was Miss Eme- 
line R. Johnston, of 124 West Front 
Street, whom I interviewed last August 
(1910). Miss Johnston was then nearly 
S9 years of age, and in full possession 
of her faculties. She told me her 
family moved into this very house in 
1S36, when she was in her fifteenth 
year and that she and her sister resided 
in the house until the time of the war 
of the rebellion when she left and her 
I sister, who is now deceased, continued 
to reside there many years afterwards. 
Miss Johnston informed me not only 
that she had always understood that 
the old house was part of the Barracks 
and occupied by the British officers, but 
ithat a daughter of Conrad Kottz, who 
< lived on the west side of South War- 
; ren Street between State Street 
land Front Street during the revolu- 
tionary war (See General Stryker's 
1 Trenton 100 Years Ago. page 11), and 
! who was 16 years old at the time of 
I the battle of Trenton, and who when 
I a widow by the name of Robinson 
' (whose fi£gt name she had forgotten, 
but who went by the name of "Aunty'' 
Robinson), called upon the Johnston 
family in 1S36, when they first moved 
into the old house, and in conversation 
told them thajt the house in which 
they were li-v-iug was standing there 
during the Revolutionary War and was 
occupied by the officers in command of 
the troops quartered in the Barracks. 
Miss Johnston also informed me that 
when she lived in the house there was 
an iron plate in the fireplace in the 
kitchen about one yard square, with 
the British coat-of-arms upon it, the 
lion and the unicorn being distinctly 
remembered by her. Many of the older 
people of Trenton are acquainted with 
Miss Johnston and knew her sister, 
and will remember the private school 
which they conducted in the old house 
for several decades. 

Now, the information imparted to me 
by the venerable and respected Miss 
Johnston is. it seems to me. perfectly 
conclusive ot the question under ex- 
amination. Here is a person who tells 
us that the old house was the 'officers' 
quarters at the Barracks, not because 
of tradition handed down to her for 
several generations, liut by testimony 
received first-hand and from the lips 
of one who was practically a contem- 
porary of the building. Furthermore, 
doubtless no one would have installed 
an iron plate bearing the Briti.sh coat- 
of-arms in that house sofm after the 
Revolutionary War. the tec-lint; asiainst 
England l.ieiiiu intense I'er mtuiy ^'ears 
after the close uf the coutliet. Again 
undoubted^' the house would not have 
t)een built where it is as a residence, 
disassociated from the Barracks, until 



after Front Street had been opened, | 
as before that time the Barracks' lot i 
was entire and In the ownership of a 
single inrti\-idual. However, 1 did not ] 
permit my researches and invcstiga- j 
tion to end here, but later disu>-'\'crcd 
a uicce iii axidfnf.f. ^vhich is doj^u- ] 
mentary m character and aosoiutely 
conclusive of the fact that the old 
khouse was a part of the Barracks. 
Having learned that Doctor Carlos ^ 
Godfrey, late of the adjutant general's 
office, had mF»de some researches con- • 
cerning the Barracks at one time, I 
told him of the investigation I was 
making and requested that he give me 
any information he might have con- 
cerning the subject in hand. He very 
obligingly told me that he had found in 
the cellar of the State House a ground 
floor plan of the Barracks, which 
showed the old house as the officers' 
quarters. Through his kindness I was 
placed in possession of the plan, or 
rather plans referred to, for they are 
in duplicate, one on each side of the 
same sheet of paper, and I have had 
them photographed. These photo- 
graphs I also send you along with this 
communication, and beg your accept- 
ance of the same. From inspection it 
would appear that the plans are not 
the working plans from which the 
Barracks were built in 175S-9, but that 
they were made at a later date and 
for a different purpose, as I will now 
proceed to show. The French and 
Indian war ended with the establish- 
ment of peace with France in 1763. 
During the year 1765 the building 
seem to have been unoccupied and the 
attention of the General Assembly was 
called to the fact in May, and they 
ordered that the perishable articles 
therein should be sold and the build- 
ing kept in repair and rented. William 
Clayton and Abraham Hunt were ap- 
pointed commissioners to carry out 
these orders of the Legislature, and 
they immediately sold the fttrniture 
and rented tlie building and premises, 
a clause in the lease requiring them 
to be given up at any time on suit- 
able notice of the Governor that they 
were needed for the use of British 
soldiers. (The Old Barracks, &c., 
pages 12 and 13). Now it will be 
observed by looking at the photographs 
of the plans that the building was 
divided into rooms, which are num- 
bered, and a price set opposite the 
number of each room. It is obvious 
that there was no one in Trenton in 
the colonial period who would for any 
reason or purpose desire to rent the 
barracks as an entirety, and therefore 
it clearly appears that the building was j 
divided into rooms for the purpose of! 
renting to families and others, and 
this arrangement must have been made 
in or about 1765 and continued down 
to 1776. Therefore this lolan must 
have been made not earlier than seven 
nor later than seventeen years after 
the erection and completion of the 
Barracks, and must have been made 
by a man who was contemporary with 
the structure and knew when he drew 
the plans and marked indelibly xipon 
them as he did "officers' house," that 
he was making a correct drawing and 
truly stating a fact concerning the 
colonial mansion on the corner of Front 
and Will'ov.- streets. 

Digressing for a few minutes from 
the examination of data concerning the 
history of this interesting structure, 
^ desire to bring to yoitr attention an 
historical incident connected with the 
Barracks not hilherto published any- 
where save in tlin piiMie records and 
archives of the St.ite. It consists of 
the documents laid before a meeting 
of the Provincial Council in 1767 con- 
cerning the reception by the last Ciil- 



froui 



onial governor, William Franklin 
Earl Shclbournc, one of the secrctane 
ot state of England 
nf an act passe. 1 



~,f tfe 



rii.;Mi; 



al 



Uur 



l.ir 



ned 



3U\'I 



missioi 

Bnrrae 

furniture anO " 

accomniudatinu' t 

or marehins thr. 

f,,r defra.ving "th 

Thus it anpears 

portance eoncev 

Barracks, amon 

passed upon by 

and his Privy CouU' 

because the act of the Lec.slattn-e o 

the colony which was vetoed, "oi'ted a 

act of Parliament. The full mnnile 

of the colonial cotmeil on this question 

is herewith submitted f" --'"■ "•=■'■■'=•'■1 

because of it ' ' 



^■ssaries tor 
he Ivinus troop.s in. 
.uuh. the colony, and 
.M- iueidental charges. 
that a niLitter of im- 
uiu!'- our historical 
g the others, was 
the Kini;- oi" Ensland 

rt di.sallr'wed 



rnsal. 
because of 



the iun-strion.* F.niillshmsn who sat in . 
Wclgmeiit, advising- Ihe King q.s to the 
audacious law of the colony. 

"At a Council held at Burling- 
ton on Friday the 26th day of No- 
vember, 1767. 

Present 
The Honble — Charles Read, John 
Smith, Samuel Smith — Esqrs. of 
his Majesty's Council. 
His Excellency laid before^ the 
Council two letters he had lately 
received from the Hight Honble 
the Earl of Shelbourne, one of his 
Majesty's Principal Secretaries of 
State, dated at White Hall- July 
ISth, 1767, and August 7th, 1767, 
enclosing the Opinion of the Board 
of Trade, that an Act of Assembly 
of this province passed in June, 
1766, ought to be disallowed, and 
his Majesty's Royal disallowance 
of the said Act, which are in the 
following words, vizt 
To the King's most E.xcellent 
Majesty, 
We have had under our Con.sid- 
eration an Act passed in your 
Majesty's Province of New Jersey 
in June, 1766, and Entituled, "An • 
Act appointing Commissioners for 
supplying the several Barracks 
Erected in this Colony with fur- 
niture and other necessarys for 
accommodating the King's Troops 
in or marching through this Col- 
ony, and for defraj'ing other inci- 
dental Charges," 

Whereupn "^'e beg leave humbly 
to represent to your Majesty That 
Whereas the Act of Parliament 
passed in the fifth year of your 
Majesty's Reign, for Amending the 
Mutiny Act, and for rendering it 
more effectual, in your Majesty's 
Dominions in America, does direct 
the Governor and Council of the ra- 
spective Provinces to appoint Com- 
missioners for furnishing j'our Ma- 
jesty's Troops with certain neces- 
saries therein Enumerated, and 
that all the Expenses incurred 
thereby shall be paid by the said 
Pi-'ovince respectively, this Law 
does on the Contrary make the 
Nomination of the said Commle- 
sioners An Act of the General 
Legislature of the Province refer- 
ring them not to the Act of Parlia- 
ment above recited but to the j 
Usage of the Province for the sev- 
eral Articles with which your Ma- 
jestys Troops are to he supplied 
and limiting the Money to be paid I 
by the said Province, on Account 
of the afs'd Service, to the Sum of 
One hundred Pounds for each of 
the five Barracks in the said Pro- 
vince. 

For these Reasons, as this Act of 
the Legislature of New Jersey does ' 
not make provision either in the ' 
Mode, or to the Extent allowed by ' 



ti,e Act of Parliament above re- 
fpiTPd to, We do hiimly recom- 
mend it to your Majesty to signify 
\oiiT Royal disallowance of this 
Act. 

Which is most humbly submitted 
Whitehall 

May Sth 1767. 

Clare 
Geo: Rice 
Wm Fitzherbert 
Thos Robinson. 
At a Court at St. James's the 13th 
day of May 1767. 
Present 
^Soa; of the 
Privy 
Council) 

The Kings Most Excellent 
Majesty 
His Royal High- Earl of Har- 
ness court 
ilic Duke of York Earl of Ilchester 
ArchBishop of Earl of Besbor- 



Canterbury 


ough 




Earl of Hillsbor- 




ough 


Ijord President 


Earl of Shel- 




burne 


l>uke of Bolton 


Viscount Fal- 




mouth 


Duke of Queens- 


Viscount Bar- 


bury 


rington 


Duke of Argyle 


Viscount Clare 


Marciuis of 


Bishop of Lon- 


Granby 


don 


Lord Steward 


Lord Berkley of 




Stratton 


Lord Chamber- 


Lord Bathurst 


lain 




Karl of Denbigh 


Lord Sandsy 


Earl of Shafts- 


Mr. Treasurer of 


bury 


the Household 


Earl of Litchfield 


Jas Stuart Mc- 




Kenzie Esqr 


Earl o£ March- 


Wellsbore Ellis 


niont 


Esqr 


Earl of Bristol 


Sir Gilbert Elliot 



Master of the 
Rolls 

Whereas by Commission under 
the Greai Seal of Great Britain, 
rhe Governor Council and As- 
sembly of his Majesty's Province 
of New Jersey are authorized and 
impowered to make, Constitute 
and Ordain, Laws, Statutes and 
Ordinances, for the publick Peace. 
\V,?lfare and good Government of 
the said Pi-vince; which Laws, 
Statutes and Ordinances are to be, 
as near as con\pniently may be, 
igreeable to the Laws and Statutes 
nf this Kingdom and to be trans- 
mitted tor his Majesty's Royal ap- 
probation or disallowance. And 
Whereas in pursuance of the said 
Powers An Act was passed in the 
said Province in 1766 and trans- 
mitted Entitled yv follows, vizt 

'An Act appuintine Commission- 
ers for .supplying the several Bar- 
'racks Erected in this Colony with 
■Furniture and other necessaries 
■for accommodating the Kings 
'Troops in or marching thro' thla 
'Colony and for defaying other in- 
'cidental Charges.' 

Which Ai-t having neen perused 
and considered by the Lords Com- 
niissrs for Trade and Plantations 
and by them presented to his Ma- 
jesty at this Board as proper 
to be disallowed. his Ma- 
jesty wa.s thereupon this Day 
pleased, with the Ad\'icp of his 
Privy f'ouncil to Declare his dis- 
allowance of the said Act. And 
pursuant to his Majesty's Royal 
Pleasure thereupon Expressed, the 
said Act is hereby disallowed, de- 
clared Void and of none Effect 
Whereof the Governor or Com- 
mander in Chief of his Majestys sd 



Province of New Jersey for the 
time being, and all others whom 
it may concern, are to take notice 
and govern themselves accord- 
ingly." 

(See Journal of Governor and Coun- 
cil. X. J. Archives, vol. 17, page 45D). 

Returning to the subject of our nar- 
rative I perhaps cannot better tell of 
tlie use and occupation of the Barracks 
during the Revolutionary War than by 
iiere inserting that part of the inscrip- 
tion on the inside tablet above re- 
ferred to, which covers the revolution- 
ary period, and is as follows: 

"For a short time preceding the 
battles of Trenton and Assunpink 
it (the Barracks) was occupied by 
British troops, Hessians, Provin- 1 
clal recruits for the service of | 
the Crown, and Tory refugees, and 
during the remainder of the war 
by troops of the Continental Line, 
State Militia and their French 
Allies." ' 

For three years after the war of the 
revolution the Barracks were dis- 
used, and on June 1, 17S6, the Legis- 
lature directed the commissioners of 
this State to sell all the barracks and 
lands attached to them. (The Old 
Barracks, &c.. page 14). 

By deed dated February 18, 1787 
(Hunterdon County clerk's office, vol- 
ume 1 of deeds at page 222), Moore 
Furman, one of the commissioners for 
the State sold the Trenton Barracks to 
Williain Ogden and "William Patter- 
son. Moore Furman was a distin- 
guiahed Jerseyman of the late colonial 
and early state epochs. He was 
Deputy Quarter Master Genera! of the 
New jersey State Troops during the 
Revolutionary War and was an all 
"round man of affairs. One of his 
descendants was the late Capt. Wil- 
liam E. Hunt, of the United States 
Navy, and his present day descendants 
in 'Trenton are of the families of 
Green. Hllson and Mcllvaine. Some 
five years after he sold the Barracks 
as Commissioner for the State. Moore 
Purman acquired the property indi- 
vidually by conveyance from William 
Ogden and William Patterson and their 
wives, by deed dated March 30, 1792, 
(Hunterdon County clerk's office, vol- 
ume 1 of deeds, page 661). The old 
Barracks and their grounds have at 
all times since the last mentioned date 
been owned by private individuals, 
first in their entirety, and afterwards 
In divided form. 

In the course of my Investigation 
I endeavored to ascertain the exact 
date of the demolition of that part of 
the Barracks through which Front 
Street was extended when opened west- 
ward from Willow Street to Delaware 
Street. General Stryker in his "Old Bar- 
racks at Trenton," page 14. says that 
this was done in the year 1813. I 
endeavored to ascertain the exact date 
in 1S13, and the source of authority 
for the extension of Front Street, and 
witli the a.ssistance of Mr. Harry B. 
Salter, city clerk of Trenton 
amined all tlie records of common 
council for that year (1813) But found 
iiolhine: relating to Front Street. With 
the aid of Mr. Alirara Swan, Jr 
(•n.yineer. 1 cxamineil Hip old atlases I 
:<n(l maps in liis otiice. hul ue could I 
lind notliing hearing on the question. I 
.Mr, John D. Faussctt, assistant state 
librarian, \ery Kindly examined the! 
nies of the newspapers covering every 
! p«1o< durltuj which the »lreet may, 
have been opened, so far as any state- | 
ment recorded in print seemed to mm- | 
cate. but found nothing on the : 
)ect. I desire to make my acUn 



sub- 



I .lect. 1 desire to mane ui.v "^l'-'-,,";,. ,■ 
' ecteem ent s to M r. Faussett for turthcij 



and other assistance in making re- 
search concerning the matter treated of 
in this article. 

In Raum's History of Trenton, at 
p. 271. it is said that Front Street was 
continued to the State House yard 
directly through the Old Barracks in 
,1801, making two separate buildings of 
it instead of one as theretofore. 

This diversity of dates between Gen. 
Stryker and Mr. Raum perplexed me. 
and I undertook by a search of the 
records for conveyances both here- and 
at Flemington. Hunterdon County, for 
jou know that Trenton was in Hun- 
terdon until Mercer County was formed 
in 1838, to ascertain when lots were 
first conveyed on Front Street includ- 
ing any part of the old Barracks, in 
the hope and expectation of finding 
that the street was laid out as a pri- 
vate enterprise by the owner of the 
entire tract, and not by virtue of any 
public authority, and thus, approxi- 
mately at least, to ascertain the date 
of its opening. In this I was disap- 
pointed, as a break in the record title 
occurs between the years 1792 and 
1815. The last recorded conveyance 
of the Barracks lot to any one was 
that to Moore Furman in 1792. above 
mentioned. The next conveyance of 
any part of the premises was in 1815, 
and is made by the heirs of Samuel W. 
Stockton. There is no conveyance of 
record here or at Flemington showing 
any divestiture of title out of Moore 
Furman or any devolution of title upon 
Samuel W. Stockton. I am indebted 
to John T. Temple and Alexander 
Trapp. Esqs.. lawyers, of this city, for 
most extensive and laborious searches 
of the records at Trenton and Flem- 
ington with regard to this matter. 
They, however, found that in 1793 the 
surveyors of the highway under and 
by virtue of proceedings in the Hun- 
terdon County Court of Common Pleas 
laid out Front Street westerly from 
Willow Street to the State House lot 
as a highway, the lines of which passed 
through the Old Barrocks. This is 
perfectl.v apparent from the beginning 
point of the new road, and its course 
as described in the return of the sur- 
veyors, corresponding as it does with 
the courses in deeds of lands bordering 
on the street. A copy of the return 
taken from Road Book "A," Hunter- 
don County, page 187, is as follows: 
"Road fr. ye end of) 
Front Street in ) 

Trenton to ye State) 
House Lot, &c. ) 

AVe the Surveyors of the High- 
ways of the Townships of Tren- 
ton, Maidenhead & Hopewell, be- 
ing legally called by order of the 
Inferior Court of Common Pleas 
for the County of Hunterdon to lay 
a road fr. the end of JYont Street 
in the City of Trenton to the State 
House Lott, & we after viewing 
the premises & hearing the allega- 
tions of all parties do agree to lay 
a road forty-two feet wide as fol- 
lows: Beginning at the end of 
Front Street afsd. near the Bar- 
racks from thence running in the 
middle of the Road North seventy 
degrees west, four chains & sev- 
enty links to the State House Lott. 
thence North twenty-two degrees 
East, three chains & forty-nine 
linlcs out into the road that leads 
from Abrm Hunt's to Beatty's 
ferry and that the said road be 
opened on or before the first day 
of September next. 

.\nd \\e the said Surveyors being 
also called by the afsd order to 
vacate a certain Alley i-unning be- 
tween the Lotts of Abr. Apple- 
ton & Isaac Peace, and we do agree 



to take up & vacate the s'd allev 
as tollows. Beginning at the end 
of said Alley at the Southeast cnr- 
ne'- of said Abr. Appleton's Lott 
.S. ,ve do agree t.n take up & va- 
i-ate the same until it intersects the 
afs d new road. In witness iihere- 
of ^-e hare hereunto set our hands 
& seals May 27th, 1793. 

John Rlgrgs, (L, g,) 

Tsrae! Moore. (jj s'l 

Theophilus Phillips (U s.) 
John Stevens. (I^. s ) 

Andrew Smith, d^. g.) 

John Temple. (l,. g.) 

Recorded May 2Sth. 1793." 
Notwithstanding- the laying out of 
the road to he opened on or before 
September 1. 1793, it seems not to have 
been accomplished in fact, at least not 
j through the Barracks building, until 
1813, although portions of Front 
Street were certainly opened between 
Willow and Delaware Streets prior to 
'is^o •'^^''' 'l^'^^use by a deed made in 
.1809 property was conveyed on the 
lower side of Front Street, east of the 
Barracks, one line of which ran to the 
I Barracks lot," and by a deed made in 
1811 property was conveyed on the 
north side of Front Street by a line 
running from Delaware Street "westerlv 
about eighty feet which, of course did 
not extend east as far as the "Bar- 
racks lot" proper. In view of these 
facts, and others which will be liere- 
after mentioned, I am of the opinion 
that General btryker was right in his 
assertion that the street was actually 
opened through the Barracks in 1813 
because: (1) he was an eminent his- 
torical authority; (2) he wrote his ac- 

f^!^nh- J'^^^? ^^° '*"<' "a'l 'setter 
facilities than I, at least traditionally 
and probably documentarv, to enable 
him to ascertain the fact; (3) Mr 
Raum was not as thorough and accu- 
rate as General Stryker. What pre- 
cedes Mr. Raum's assertion that Front 
I street was opened west of Willow 
Street in 1801 is this: he savs the 
buildings known as White Hal] (Old 
Barracks) were erected bv the King 
as barracks for his officers. This wl 
know IS a mistake. The King never 
erected the Barracks, nor was his per- 
mission even asked. Thev were 
erected exclusively by the colnnv and 
maintained for its defence. True" thev 
housed the soldiers of the King but 
were not built exclusivelv for officers 
Then again, in describing tlie building 
I Mr. Raum says it commenced at Wil- 
low Street, extended west toward the 
j State House, thence ran south crossing 
Front Street, thence taking an easterlv 
direction terminated again at Willow 
Street, forming three sides of a hollow 
square. As Front Street, by his own 
assertion, was not opened until 1801 
the Barracks running south in 17.58 
could not have crossed that street, un- 
less he means they crossed what i= 
now Front Street. The description if 
not inaccurate, is certainly loose. 
Therefore I say that General Strvker's 
date should be given -the preference 
and as no information is obtainable 
showing any other date as the time of 
the actual demolition of the walls of 
the building to admit of the extension 
of Front Street, that year, 1813, should, 
I think, unhesitatingly be accepted as 
the true date of the event. 

It must be a source of pride to Tren- 
ton that the Barracks here are the only 
ones of the five erected that are pre- 
served in anything like original form 
and appearance. I have made inquiry 
of gentlemen living in the other cities 
where barracks were erected, namely 
former Chancellor ^Magie of Elizabeth' 



Captain James Parker of Perth Ambov 
!Mr. Henry S. Haines of Burlington' 
surveyor general of West New .Terscv 
and Mr. AVilliam H. Benedict of NeW 
: Brunswick, and learn from them that 
'the old barracks in their respective 
towns are totally demolished, with ona 
exception and that is in Burlington 
where but fragments of the original 
structure remain. Tliese remnants of 
barracks are incorporated into St 
Paul's Catholic Church and Parochial 
behool. Burlington. Thev con>:lst of 
tlie extreme end of the wings of the 
barracks,, one being the rear portion 
; of the church and the other the rear of 
the school. The barracks there, unlike 
those at Trenton, were built of brick 
instead of stone. Mr. Francis B Lee 
and I visited Burlington and inspected 
the remains of its barracks in com- 
pany with Mr. Henry .S. Haines, during 1 
the month of December last (1910) Jir I 

hl%,fi'')uJ^^'''^-^^'"l ""'"i"'? that th«i 
hniw \f^ Burlington barracks were 
u,lt of bricks was because bricks 
V ere manufactured in that locality at 
tnat time and no stone quarries existed 
n the neighborhood. At Trenton as 
^\e Know, there are numerous quarries 
one or more of which were open in 
pre-revolutionary da.vs. 

Besides the oid mansion on the 

whi'ch\""'^, "'"'■' "^ 'he Barracks 
which was the north wing proper is 
now incorporated into the three dwell- 
ing houses to the west of the mansion, 
being Nos. iqb. iqs and 110 West 
Front Street. The two houses adjohi- 
ing the mansion are under the original 
Barracks' roof is as plainly to he seen 
by a mere inspection, and bv com- 
parison with the roof on the old build- 
ing which is Intact on the south side 
ot the street. The most westerly 
house IS extended several feet into 
Front Street and built above the i 
original Barracks roof. The lower 
west wall however, of this building and ' 
the rear wails of all of them are of the I 
original structure of 1T5S. j 

It will be noticed by even a casual ; 
observer that the front wall of the 
mansion and the two adjoining houses ^ 
on the west are of brick instead of 
stone and the question arises: were 
the buildings thus constructed origi- 
nally, or were they altered at or after 
tjie time of the extension of Front 
street? Mr. Jules S. Ferriot. a mason 
builder of this city, at my request 
made a careful Inspection of these 
buildings and gives it as his unqtialified 
opinion that the brick walls were not 
originally incorporated in them but 
were put in afterwards. This, coupled 
with General Stryker's assertion that 
the building was "entirely of stone " 
seems to abundantly show that tlie 
brick walls must have been of later 
origin than the structure itself. An- 
otlier evidence that the brick walls 
were put in at or after the alteration 
of the Barracks is this: When the 
change was made a new front wall 
had to be supplied to the most westerly 
part of the building on the north side 
of Front Street, and the wall when 
bui t extended into the street on a line 
with the officers' quarters on the east, 
leaving the intermediate building a few 
feet back in recess, as the two houses 
composing it exist today. The front 
ot the most westerly house wall 
was of brick Maj. Samuel S. Aa-m- ' 
strong has informed me, and says he ! 
well remembers his father, the late | 
Horatio G. Armstrong, covering it with 
stucco and raising the roof another 
story in the year 1863. 

My theor.v is that when Front Street , 
was extended and the north wing of ! 
the Barracks including the officers' ' 
quarters was detached and turned into , 



residences, the bvick walls were pi 
the fronts by the then owner or ow 
I to give them a more modern aop 
«nce and to dissociate them as" rr 
as possible from the old Barrack' 
which they had been an integral t 
httle dreainmg that that associa 
would be a desideratum in fu 
generations. 

A matter barely mentioned, 
whicli IS of interest, is the fact 1 
the Barracks have been known to s. 
extent as White Hall. Reference 
them by that name is to be found 
quently m old conveyances. Lost 
in his Field Book of the Revolut 

tT K ■, P^^'' , -"• "'^I^^s mention 
the building by that name and pri 
a sketch of it made by himself w 
on his visit to Trenton in search 
historic data in the j-ear 1849. 

Some of the pictures of the Old B 
racks that have heretofore app'ca 
have shown It with plain walls runn 
trom the ground to the overhang- 
eves of Its roof, and some have sho 
It with a balcony between the first e 
second stories on the inner sides of 
square. That the balcony existed th 
is the most cogent proof. A glance 
the walls facing north and east of i 
^ti"", .?. portion on the south side 
Front Street will disclose the ends 
sawed off joists on a line with ( 
second noor. These joists are close 
gether and thus gave the balcony gr. 
strength, which was required Tl 
fact, coupled with the pictures whi 
amount to corroborating evidence < 
tabhsh, be.vond doubt the fact of t 
existence of the balcony in the eai 
days ot the structure, and. therefore 
have had the balcony incorporated ir 
the drawing which I .send .vou A 
other thing: Mr. MacGinnis, "who dr( 
the picture, discovered the exact nur 
bebr of posts that supported the b£ 
-cony and has correctly reproduc 
them. Their marks are still visih 
under the eves of the remaining ro 
and indicate the entire number oris 
: nally existing. 

I Before leaving the subject I desi 
to express my thanks to Judge Gan- 
D W. Vroom. Francis B, Leo Esq.. ar 
T\iIIiam Nelson, Esq., corresponds 
secretary of the New .Tersey Historic 
Society, for valuable inf.nrniatinn ar 
suggestions with reference to tht siii 
ject of this article. 

I will trespass upon your time to e- 
ploit but a single other thought an 
one for which I claim no orig-inalit^ 
one that has been rather wished tha 
hoped for, —but one that is perfect! 
feaslh e and may some day be an ac 
compllshed reality. It is the restora 
tion of the old Barracks to their origi 
nal condition. Independence Hall th 
historic old State House in Philadel 
phia has been restored, why not the ol 
Barracks at Trenton? 

t=,bUt"J^T''i''''r''-"' "' "'" ""^•^•>"li"S- of th 
tablets I took occasion to remark, tha 
in a humble way it may be said tha 
this building bears something of th 
same relation to Trenton as "does th 
lower of London to the historic city o 
that name We cannot boa.st that 'thi: 
stronghold iias never fallen into th. 
hands of a foreign foe, as Rnglant 
proudly boasts of her Tower, but w. 
ma.y with pride allude to the fact tha- 
within these walls no such frightfu 
scenes of blood and carnage have beoi 
enacted as in -that gloomy fortress or 
the banks of the River Thames 'Witl 
"S. quite differently, these bioodlps-s 
Barracks are associated with hallowed 
memories of the Revolution 



Think of the possibilities to bp de- 
rived from a restoration of this his- 
tonr structure! Within its walls 
might he instituted an armnrv, as in 
the Tower of Lon.lnn. where various 
weapon? used in warfare misrht he ex- 
hibiterl, f^peeially \reapons whieh are 
of histori.- value in themselves. Meet- 
ings of patriotic socielies coukl he there 
held, and innumerable other uses and 
advantages could be attained. These 
are but suggestions. This is a fact: 
If these Rarraek.s were restored the\- 
would comprise one of the most ifl 
not the most, historic building in the ' 
State of New .Tersey! Is this not a! 
matter in whicli n^t only the citizens j 
of Trenton hii) Ihe citizens of the! 
state should take an interest? Are not ' 
Ihe old Barracks something for the [ 
people of New Jer.sey to cherish witli ! 
pride? At least, the Barracks as they . 
now exist will he preserved, and I can- 
not, I think, more fittingly conclude 
this article than to again quote from 
my address at the unveiling of the 
tablet and say: 

If in the calm that succeeded the 
storm — if during the period that fol- 
lowed the revolutionary struggle— the 
supporters and defenders of our coun- 
try, weary of the conflict, turned their 
Iiearts and minds to other things, and 
permitted the ravages of time to oli- 
literate many an object of historic in- 
terest, W", their descendants, atone for 
their sins of omission, and, fired with 
an unalteral>le zeal, are resolved, that 
every remaining relic shall he' pre- 
served — a siuied ;tltar! at whose shrine 
Vv'e ma>- wnr.^liiij. 

In 'this spirit tliese Barracks \\-ill be 
preserved: — pi-'Served in tiie iiame uf 
their builders; in tiie narne of their 
owners: — for all time ami for all tlie 
people, — a link connedin.g tlie martial 
past \ritli ilie peaceful present 
Kespectrullv, 
KOWT.K R'JBEl-rr AS'ALKE.R. 



he proves conclusively that the build- 
ing on the northwest corner of Front 



Ti.f 



Zttv^n Cliri^i ^im$pk 

FOUNDED 1882 



MOXDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1911. 



"THE OLD BARRACKS." 

Vice Chancellor Edwin Roliert Wal 
ker, in a communication to Mrs. J 
i.'urray Forst, president of the -Old 
Barracks'" Association of Trenton, 
niaUos ;i]i important and highly inter- 
esting contribution to the history of 
the colonial structure on AV,..bt Front 
Street — undoubtedly the oihos- l.iiilding 

in the city, and one ot il Id. ;si in 

the State. There has never l.rrn a 
question about tho date of the erec- 
tion of the "Barracks," or "White 
Hall," as it was at one time quite 
popularly known; but there has been 
.-'. doulpt — as, indeed, there still is — as to 
the time when Front Street was cut 
♦hrouffh. 

X^robably thie most interesting part of 
Ml-. VValb^r'sA^e^^W is tliat..4n which 



and Willow Streets, and adjoining tile 
portion of the Barracks standing on 
the northerly side of Front Street, is 
the ;idditiun which the late General 
Strykcr sa.\-s was built in December, 
17.5S, to l:.e used us quarters for the 
officers wlio were in command of the 
troops stationed at the Barracks. 
Trained lawyer that he is, the Vice 
<'hanccllor was not content to draw" 
conclusions from tradition, hut has 
fortilied every statement with docu- 
mentary, and what may be regarded as 
almost contemporary, evidence that is 
uncoutrovcrtiblc. 

Ir, brief, Mr. Walker shows that the 
Barracks were built in 1758, and par- 
tially occupied in December of that 
year; tliat the land and the buildings 
(including the ofHoers' quarters) cost 
.C.3.4S7. Os, lid; that the buildings were 
entirely of stone and extended across 
"s\'cot Front Street; that the northerly 
end of the building, and the addition 
used by the officers, are still standin, 
fheuigh considerably changed from their 
original appearance; that the build- 
ings were successively occupied by 
British troops. Hessians, Provincial re- 
cruits, Tory refugees, by Continental 
I Bine, State Militia and their French 
I allies; that the extension of West 
I Front Street was authorized in 1793 
but not perfected until 1813; and that 
; the Trenton Barracks are the only ones 
of the five erected at the same- time, 
that are preserved in anything like 
original form and appearance. 

Mr. Walker's communication bears 
evidence of long and painstaking in- 
vestigation, in which he had the as- 
sistance of a number of persons to 
whotn he makes acknowledgement. It 
\\ill dispose effectually of considerable 
misinformation that the public has 
gathered concerning Trenton's historic 
building. His suggestion that the Bar- 
.aLl:s l>e restored to their original con- 
dition will receive the hearty endorse- 
ment .jf all Trentonians, who will join 
in the queries: "Is this not a matter in 
which not only the citizens of Trenton 
fail llie citizens of the State should 
t;a;e an interest 7 Are not the old 
.1 :.i)-i':uks .siimething for the people of 
New ..lcrse\- to cherish with pride?" 

The State is caring for ihe Wash- 
iimton's Headquarters binlding, at 
Alorristfiwu; the Reil Ta\crn, at Had- 
loulield: buildings at Rocky Hill and 
.lonu'rville; and has siient considerable 
nuney for monuments and tablets to 
mark historic spots, none of which 
iias so great an interest as the Bar- 
racks. Now, when the State is mak- 



ing plans, tor enlarging the Capitol I 
site, is an appropriate time for it to 
i.iake provision for acquiring and re- 
storing the "Old Barracks." i 



LIBRftRY OF CONGRESS 



llllllll INI II 
014 209 318 2 ^ 



